Observational studyJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2025
Evaluation of 2 different wrist actigraphy devices in the adult population.
Observational study in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesActigraphy devices are used in sleep medicine. The Actiwatch 2 (Philips Respironics) was an example of a frequently used device in this field. Nevertheless, the discontinuation of this device has led to an increased necessity for the implementation of other available actigraphy methods capable of providing objective information. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of the new ActTrust 2 compared to the Actiwatch 2 model.
methodsThis observational prospective study included 9 participants (77.760 activity logs) who were monitored for 7 days using 2 actigraphy wrist devices (ActTrust 2 and Actiwatch 2) simultaneously. The following variables were evaluated: midline estimating statistic of rhythm, amplitude, and acrophase; intradaily variability; interdaily stability; relative amplitude; and the mean of 5 consecutive hours with the lowest activity and the 10 consecutive hours with the highest activity. Furthermore, total sleep time, time in bed, sleep efficiency, sleep onset latency, wake after sleep onset, and awakenings were also included.
resultsActigraphy models indicated statistically significant differences in activity levels. Regarding the analysis of circadian rest-activity rhythms, 10 consecutive hours with the highest activity, midline estimating statistic of rhythm, and amplitude also exhibited these differences. Furthermore, the analysis of sleep-wakefulness revealed significant differences in the sleep onset latency and the number of awakenings.
conclusionsThe ActTrust 2 and Actiwatch 2 models showed equivalent results in measuring circadian rest-activity rhythm and sleep. However, caution is advised when interpreting parameters such as midline estimating statistic of rhythm, amplitude, sleep onset latency, awakenings, and 10 consecutive hours with the highest activity variables. CITATION: Henríquez-Beltrán M, Benítez ID, Juez-Garcia I, et al. Evaluation of 2 different wrist actigraphy devices in the adult population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.